D&D 5E Charm Person failure question

[Zeoh]

So, I was wondering about how a certain aspect of charm person actually works. I do know that, should you successfully charm the person, they will know that they were charmed once the effect expires. (as per the spell description)

I also know that, according to the PHB204, "Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature’s thoughts, typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise."

According to the wording of charm person, "When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you."

So, my question is, if the target succeeds a will save and is not charmed at all, does it know that a charm spell was ever cast upon it? In the circumstance I'm asking about, a stealth check was also succeeded to hide the vocal and somatic components.

Any opinions are appreciated, but if someone knows of an official ruling related to this that'd also be great!

 

[Harzel]

So, I was wondering about how a certain aspect of charm person actually works. I do know that, should you successfully charm the person, they will know that they were charmed once the effect expires. (as per the spell description)

I also know that, according to the PHB204, "Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature’s thoughts, typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise."

According to the wording of charm person, "When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you."

So, my question is, if the target succeeds a will save and is not charmed at all, does it know that a charm spell was ever cast upon it? In the circumstance I'm asking about, a stealth check was also succeeded to hide the vocal and somatic components.

Any opinions are appreciated, but if someone knows of an official ruling related to this that'd also be great!

Just my opinion, but I would rule that the target definitely knows that 'something' happened. A creature of average or better intelligence might be able to guess that it was a magical something if there is a reasonable amount of magic that goes on in your world. They would only know what happened specifically if they had some degree of experience with such things. Whether or not they would be able to guess who did it would be highly dependent on circumstances. The successful stealth roll makes guessing who less likely, but it's hard for me to say whether I would rule it impossible or subject to a check.

 

[marcelvdpol]

So, I was wondering about how a certain aspect of charm person actually works. I do know that, should you successfully charm the person, they will know that they were charmed once the effect expires. (as per the spell description)

I also know that, according to the PHB204, "Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature’s thoughts, typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise."

According to the wording of charm person, "When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you."

So, my question is, if the target succeeds a will save and is not charmed at all, does it know that a charm spell was ever cast upon it? In the circumstance I'm asking about, a stealth check was also succeeded to hide the vocal and somatic components.

Any opinions are appreciated, but if someone knows of an official ruling related to this that'd also be great!

I would rule that if the intended target succesfully passes an Arcana check he would know about it. If he doesnt pass, he would know something "odd" happened in his mind but wouldnt know the cause. Since the target doesnt know its a spell that is the cause he would probably be a bit suspicious but it would totally depend on the surroundings as to what he would be suspicious about (if the party is the only ones in the neighbourhood or if the target is on a busy marketplace for example).

 

[Rod Staffwand]

As a saving throw represents actively resisting a spell effect, my view is that the target knows they are being "magically assaulted" and needs to marshal their (in this case mental) defenses to thwart the attack. The target knows they are the target of a hostile spell. Since I always let a target know the consequences of a failed save (or any roll), they would be privy to the fact it was a charm person spell.

 

[alienux]

In addition to what has been said, I would probably also take the target's INT or WIS score into consideration. If it's low, I'd rule that they don't notice anything, but if it's high, I'd either have them do a check to see if they notice.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

As a saving throw represents actively resisting a spell effect, my view is that the target knows they are being "magically assaulted" and needs to marshal their (in this case mental) defenses to thwart the attack. The target knows they are the target of a hostile spell. Since I always let a target know the consequences of a failed save (or any roll), they would be privy to the fact it was a charm person spell.

I don't think that's always the case. I think saving throws can just as easily be an unconscious, reflexive effort to protect yourself. When you fall forward, you don't have to think to catch yourself with your hands, it just happens. I'd say it could be the same with mental defenses.

But for the OP, I think this largely depends on how common magic is in your world and the likelihood that the target may have at some point been exposed to it. If magic is uncommon, the individual might think it was a passing migraine or some indigestion or something. If magic is common but the target has not been exposed to such spells, they may assume (or not) that something magical happened, but whatever it was has passed. If magic is common and/or they have been exposed to it (for instance, when I think of Eberron, which is kind of a magic-as-technology setting, all city watch in big cities and probably basic military training includes having people be targeted with charm effects to understand what it is like and better identify it), then the individual would likely know that they have had a charm effect attempted on them.

 

[dco]

I'm of the opinion that you can not use stealth, which is an action that implies trying to not make noise, while you cast a spell which is another action that implies a "combination of sounds, specific pitch and resonance", it could be argued that the pitch could be super low like some whispers but then there is a metamagic ability that lets do avoid the verbal component, allowing stealth would make that ability worse.

It is debatable if the target should know, you have "might not know" and "knows it was charmed by you". I think he should know if he resists the spell or at least I would let him roll with positive modifiers (more if he saw or heard how the spell was cast). My reasoning is that targets should know they did something against their will without the text telling it explicitly, for example with the command spell I suppose the target should know if he moved against his will, "knows it was charmed by you" is an extra explanation but I interpret it is also applicable when it was not succesful. There are other spells like detect thoughts or command which I find more suitable to be concealed from the target if they fail, detect thought is a self spell, it doesn't need savings throws unless you dig deeper and then it says the target knows, command is a one word spell and doesn't have the extra "he knows...

But that's how I do it, your game your rules. Remember that if you let the players use stealth for casting spells then target is at a disadvantage already, they can not roll to know what is being casted, ask about what has been casted, cast counterspells, etc.

 

[Jester David]

The importrant thing is the spell didn't fail: they fought off the effects. If the spell had actually failed - due to some funky terrain or an antimagic field - no save would have been required, and the target would have no idea. But they rolled a saving throw, and thus had an active part in events.

I'd rule they felt the magic try to influence their mind as fought it off. They might not know if it was a friends cantrip or a dominate person spell, but they'd know something was up.